Can a connectionist model explain the processing of regularly and irregularly inflected words in German as L1 and L2?

Abstract

The connectionist model is a prevailing model of the structure and functioning of the cognitive system of the processing of morphology. According to this model, the morphology of regularly and irregularly inflected words (e.g., verb participles and noun plurals) is processed in the same cognitive network. A validation of the connectionist model of the processing of morphology in German as L2 has yet to be achieved. To investigate L2-specific aspects, we compared a group of L1 speakers of German with speakers of German as L2. L2 and L1 speakers of German were assigned to their respective group by their reaction times in picture naming prior to the central task. The reaction times in the lexical decision task of verb participles and noun plurals were largely consistent with the assumption of the connectionist model. Interestingly, speakers of German as L2 showed a specific advantage for irregular compared with regular verb participles.

Keywords

connectionist models German as L2 lexical decision task morphological regularity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Basnight-Brown

D. M.

Chen

Hua

Kostic

Feldman

L. B.

(2007). Monolingual and bilingual recognition of regular and irregular english verbs: Sensitivity to form similarity varies with first language experience. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 65–80.

Beeckmans

Eyckmans

Janssens

Dufranne

Van de Velde

(2001). Examining the Yes/No vocabulary test: Some methodological issues in theory and practice. Language Testing, 18, 235–274.

Bird

Lambon Ralph

M. A.

Seidenberg

M. S.

McClelland

J. L.

Patterson

(2003). Deficits in phonology and past-tense morphology: What’s the connection? Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 502–526.

Birdsong

(2004). Second language acquisition and ultimate attainment. In Davies

Elder

(Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 82–105). London: Blackwell.

Birdsong

Flege

J. E.

(2001). Regular–irregular dissociations in L2 acquisition of English morphology. In Do

A. J.

Domínguez

Johansen

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, vols 1 and 2 (pp. 123–132). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.

Brown

(1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Clahsen

(1997). The representations of participles in the German mental lexicon: Evidence for the dual-mechanism model. In Booij

G. E.

Marle

J. V.

(Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1996 (pp. 1–31). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Clahsen

(1999). Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 991–1060.

Cohen

J. D.

MacWhinney

Flatt

Provost

(1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 257–271.

10.

DeKeyser

R. M.

(2001). Automaticity and automatization. In Robinson

(Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125–151). New York: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Faroqi-Shah

(2007). Are regular and irregular verbs dissociated in non-fluent aphasia? A meta-analysis. Brain Research Bulletin, 74, 1–13.

12.

Faul

Erdfelder

Buchner

Lang

A.-G.

(2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.

13.

Forster

K. I. F.

Chambers

S. M.

(1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 627–635.

14.

Francis

W. N.

Kucera

(1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

15.

Gor

Cook

(2010). Nonnative processing of verbal morphology: In search of regularity. Language Learning, 60(1), 88–126.

16.

Grainger

Dijkstra

(1992). On the representation and use of language information in bilinguals. In Harris

R. J.

(Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 207–220). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publications.

17.

Hahne

Mueller

Clahsen

(2006). Morphological processing in a second language: Behavioural and event-related potential evidence for storage and decomposition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 121–134.

18.

Jared

Kroll

J. F.

(2001). Do bilinguals activate phonological representations in one or both of their languages when naming words? Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 2–31.

19.

Järvikivi

Bertram

Niemi

(2006). Affixal salience and the processing of derivational morphology: The role of suffix allomorphy. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 394–431.

20.

Joanisse

M. F.

Seidenberg

M. S.

(1999). Impairments in verb morphology following brain injury: A connectionist model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96, 7592–7597.

21.

Johnston

R. A.

Barry

(2006). Age-of-acquisition and lexical processing. Visual Cognition, 13, 789–845.

22.

Justus

Larsen

de Morney Davies

Swick

(2008). Interpreting dissociations between regular and irregular past-tense morphology: Evidence from event-related potentials. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioural Neuroscience, 8(2), 178–194.

23.

MacKay

James

L. E.

Abrams

(2002). Cross-language facilitation, repetition blindness, and the relation between language and memory: Replications of Altarriba and Sultano (1996) and support for a new theory. In Heredia

R. R.

Altarriba

(Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 89–109). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

24.

Maratsos

(2000). More overregularizations after all. Journal of Child Language, 28, 32–54.

25.

Marcus

G. F.

Brinkmann

Clahsen

Wiese

Pinker

(1995). German inflection: The exception that proves the rule. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 189–256.

26.

Marslen-Wilson

W. D.

(1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition. Cognition, 25, 71–102.

27.

McClelland

J. L.

Patterson

(2002). Rules or connections in past-tense inflections: what does the evidence rule out? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 465–472.

28.

Meier

(1964). Deutsche Sprachstatistik. Hamburg: Buske.

29.

Meunier

Marslen-Wilson

W. D.

(2004). Regularity and irregularity in French verb inflection. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(4), 561–580.

30.

Meuter

R. I.

Allport

(1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40(1), 25–40.

31.

Meyer

D. E.

Schvaneveldt

R. W.

(1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.

32.

Mochida

Harrington

(2006). The Yes/No test as a measure of receptive vocabulary knowledge. Language Testing, 23(1), 73–98.

33.

Neubauer

Clahsen

(2009). Decomposition of inflected words in a second language: An experimental study of German participles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 403–435.

34.

Oldfield

(1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 352–360.

35.

Orsolini

Marslen-Wilson

W. D.

(1997). Universals in morphological representation: Evidence from Italian. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 1–47.

36.

Pinker

(1999). Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York: Basic Books.

37.

Pinker

Ullman

(2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Science, 6,456–463.

38.

Pfeffer

(1964). Grunddeutsch: Basic (spoken) German word list: Grundstufe. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: MIT Press.

39.

Projekt Deutscher Wortschatz (n.d.) Wörterbuch Deutsch-Englisch. URL (accessed 29 March 2011): www.dict.uni-leipzig.de

40.

Ramscar

(2002). The role of meaning in inflection: Why the past tense doesn’t require a rule. Cognitive Psychology, 45, 45–94.

41.

Rubenstein

Garfield

Millikan

J. A.

(1970). Homographic entries in the internal lexicon. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 487–494.

42.

Rumelhart

McClelland

J. L.

(1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In McClelland

J. L.

Rumelhart

the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Vol. 1: Foundations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: MIT Press.

43.

Segalowitz

(2003). Automaticity and second languages. In Doughty

Long

M. H.

(Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–408). Oxford: Blackwell.

44.

Smolka

Rösler

Wiese

(2003). Morphological and semantic priming effects in the processing of German verbs: Evidence from reaction times and event related potentials. In Bajo

Lupianez

(Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology ESCoP 2003, Granada, Spain (p. 494). Monachil: Imprenta Santa Rita.

45.

Smolka

Zwitserlood

Rösler

(2007). Stem access in regular and irregular inflection: Evidence from German participles. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(3), 325–347.

46.

Snodgrass

J. G.

Vanderwart

(1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 174–215.

47.

Ullman

M. T.

(2004). Contributions of neural memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92(1–2), 231–270.

48.

Ullman

M. T.

Corkin

Coppola

Hickok

Growdon

J. H.

Koroshetz

W. J.

Pinker

(1997). A neural dissociation within language: Evidence that the mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the procedural system. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(2), 266–276.

49.

Ullman

M. T.

Pancheva

Love

Yee

Swinney

Hickok

(2005). Neural correlates of lexicon and grammar: Evidence from the production, reading, and judgment of inflection in aphasia. Brain and Language, 93(2), 185–238.